Subject:
|
Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 23 Nov 2000 14:24:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
286 times
|
| |
|
|
Let me try to be clearer.
In lugnet.admin.general, Kevin Loch writes:
> Are you sure it's not latency in DNS resolution?
This is almost certainly what a lot of it indeed is. Using jump.cgi
theoretically doubles the latency since two resolutions are required. But
it's not ALL the delay, some surely, is at the server itself while it processes.
> > Recently, though, I am seeing that the delay introduced is going up,
> > significantly. In fact, so much delay is being added, that on this brand new
> > 750 Mhz P3 384m Windows 2000 system (where I haven't tweaked any of the time
> > parameters)... on this fairly fast system, when I am dialed in, about 1/2
> > the time IE times out. I have to then manually strip off the jump stuff to
> > actually get to the URL.
The point here is that the delay, being over twice as bad, now exceeds the
threshold that IE has, which I haven't changed. And hence, since it's
network delay, throwing more sand at the problem at my end doesn't help.
I am curious, however, as to how much of the delay is due to processing on
the server. Moreover, I would put up with the delay less grumpily if I had
access to the data, that is, if the delay somehow benefited me (except in
the meta sense). Finally, I suggest that on the post preview page, it be
suppressed, since those jumps are not statistically meaningful.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
| (...) If you're reading via HTTP, then it's only one resolution because your client will already have resolved www.lugnet.com. If you're reading via NNTP, then it may be two and it may be one depending on your DNS cache. (...) With a typical URL, (...) (24 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
| Are you sure it's not latency in DNS resolution? That is usually a big factor in how fast a page comes up. A good test is to try the same link again with your browser cache turned off and see what happens. While I understand the usefulness of the (...) (24 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
36 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
